Re: changelog rotation...

[jtc at redback dot com (J.T. Conklin)]

>>>>> "Fernando" == Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com> writes:
>> I see no reason not to.  If we did, I'd split ChangeLog-9091 into two
>> files.  There's not much of a reason for it to be one file anyway, if
>> everything else is split by single years.

Fernando> I agree.  Are you doing the renaming?  Nobody seems to
Fernando> disagree and this has been the standard practice for years
Fernando> anyway.  I guess it was just a question of someone getting
Fernando> around to do it.

I'll do the renaming as long as no one really wants to do it.  The
bulk of what I want to do is still stalled waiting for an approval, 
so I'm keeping myself occupied doing little stuff on the side.

So the current proposal is:

        * rename ChangeLog-9X to ChangeLog-199X
        * split ChangeLog-9091 into ChangeLog-1990 and ChangeLog-1991        
        * split ChangeLog-2000 out of ChangeLog.

Any objections?  If not, I intend to check in this tomorrow.

        --jtc

-- 
J.T. Conklin
RedBack Networks